For many years, steel moment-resisting frames (SMRF) with welded beam-column connections were thought to be the best lateral-force-resisting system for buildings in high-seismic regions. However, the 1994 Northridge earthquake revealed the important vulnerabilities of what are now referred to as pre-Northridge connections, which experienced unanticipated brittle fractures in many buildings in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Region. There are several tall SMRF buildings with pre-Northridge connections worldwide, raising serious safety concerns about their performance during future earthquakes. To investigate possible undiscovered damage in these types of connections, an advanced probabilistic regional seismic risk and damage assessment is conducted on 97 tall SMRF buildings in the Financial District of San Francisco, California, with pre-Northridge beam-column connections that were subjected to the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. This study aims to identify the buildings, floor levels, and orientations more likely to have experienced brittle fractures during the Loma Prieta earthquake. Results indicate that despite this earthquake being only moderate in magnitude with an epicenter approximately 95 km away from the Financial District, peak inter-story drift ratios in the tall buildings reach 0.65%. Median peak probabilities of yielding and fracture of beam-column connections do not exceed 37% and 12%, respectively. As a result of ground motion directionality and differences in grid plan in the city, buildings located south of Market Street experienced considerably greater building responses and probabilities of damage than buildings located north of Market Street. Estimates of damage from this study suggest that some pre-Northridge beam-column connections likely fractured during the Loma Prieta earthquake, but the fractures were not as widespread as in the 1994 Northridge earthquake. However, earthquakes with either higher magnitudes or closer source-to-site distances to the city of San Francisco may cause significant damage to SMRF buildings constructed before the Northridge earthquake.
AagaardBTGravesRWRodgersABrocherTMSimpsonRWDregerDPeterssonNALarsenSCMaSJachensRC (2010) Ground-motion modeling of Hayward fault scenario earthquakes, Part II: Simulation of long-period and broadband ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100(6): 2945–2977.
2.
Alonso-RodríguezAMirandaE (2016) Dynamic behavior of buildings with non-uniform stiffness along their height assessed through coupled flexural and shear beams. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering14(12): 3463–3483.
3.
AndersonJBerteroV (1998) Seismic response of a 42-story steel building. The Loma Prieta, California, Earthquake of October 17, 1989: Performance of the built environment, building structures. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1552-C, 14November, pp. c113–c140. Denver, CO: U.S. Geological Survey.
4.
AstanehABonowitzDChenC (1991) Evaluating design provisions and actual performance of a modern high-rise steel structure. In: Seminar on Seismological and Engineering Implications of Recent Strong-motion Data, Sacramento, CA, 30 May. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, pp. 51.
5.
ATC-119 (2018) San Francisco tall buildings study. Technical Report, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, December.
6.
ATC-3-06 (1978) Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings: A cooperative effort with the design professions, building code interests, and the research community (No. 6). Technical Report, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, June.
7.
ATC-58 (2009) Guidelines for seismic performance assessment of buildings. Technical Report, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, 31May.
8.
BaiseLGKaklamanosJBerryBMThompsonEM (2016) Soil amplification with a strong impedance contrast: Boston, Massachusetts. Engineering Geology202: 1–13.
9.
BantisJCMirandaE (2023) Evaluation of random-vibration procedures to estimate response spectral ordinates on soft soil sites from Fourier amplitude spectra. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering166: 107776.
10.
BantisJMirandaE (2024) Effect of damping on response spectral ordinates of ground motions recorded on soft soils in the San Francisco Bay Area. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Epub ahead of print 25April. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4807877.
11.
BantisJMirandaEHeresiP (2024a) Simplified site response analysis for regional seismic risk assessments. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering188: 109022.
12.
BantisJHeresiPPoulosAMirandaE (2024b) Framework for regional seismic risk assessments of groups of tall buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics54: 833–850.
BerteroVBlondetMBondadDEnglehardtMGilaniAPopovERoederCSabolTShueyBStepanovLStojadinovicBUangCMWhittakerA (1996) Experimental Investigations of Beam-Column Subassemblages, Part 1 and 2. Report for SAC Steel Project Prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Report No. SAC 96-01, January. Washington, DC: SAC.
15.
BooreDM (2010) Orientation-independent, nongeometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100(4): 1830–1835.
16.
BooreDMStewartJPSeyhanEAtkinsonGM (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1057–1085.
17.
BorcherdtRDGlassmoyerG (1992) On the characteristics of local geology and their influence on ground motions generated by the Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco Bay region, California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America82(2): 603–641.
18.
CampbellKW (1991) An empirical analysis of peak horizontal acceleration for the Loma Prieta, California, earthquake of 18 October 1989. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America81(5): 1838–1858.
19.
CelebiM (1992) Highlights of Loma Prieta responses for four tall buildings. In: Proceedings of 10th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, 19–24 July, pp. 4039–4044. New York: Springer.
20.
CruzC (2017) Evaluation of Damping Ratios Inferred from the Seismic Response of Buildings. PhD Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
21.
CruzCMirandaE (2017) Evaluation of the Rayleigh damping model for buildings. Engineering Structures138: 324–336.
22.
DickensonSE (1994) Dynamic Response of Soft and Deep Cohesive Soils during the Loma Prieta Earthquake of October 17, 1989. PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
23.
ElsesserE (2004) Seismically resistant design–past, present, future. In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No 2034, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
24.
EngelhardtMDHusainAS (1993) Cyclic-loading performance of welded flange-bolted web connections. Journal of Structural Engineering119(12): 3537–3550.
25.
EngelhardtMDSabolTAUzarskiJ (1995) Analysis of a 6 story steel moment frame building in Santa Monica (SAC Building Site 7). Report for SAC Steel Project. Report No. SAC 95–04, July. Washington, DC: SAC.
26.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (1997) NEHRP commentary on the guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Report No. FEMA 274, October. Washington DC: FEMA.
27.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000a) Recommended seismic evaluation and upgrade criteria for existing welded steel moment-frame buildings. Report No. FEMA 351, June. Washington, DC: FEMA.
28.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000b) A policy guide to steel moment-frame construction. Report No. FEMA 354, November. Washington, DC: FEMA.
29.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000c) State of the art report on connection performance. Report No. FEMA 355D, September. Washington, DC: FEMA.
30.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000d) State of the art report on past performance of steel moment-frame buildings in earthquakes. Report No. FEMA 355, September. Washington, DC: FEMA.
31.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (2006) PAST, present and future 7. Risk management series: Designing for earthquakes-a manual for architects. Report No. FEMA 454, December. Washington, DC: FEMA.
32.
GalvisFADeierleinGGMolina HuttC (2024) Database of tall pre-Northridge steel moment frames for earthquake performance evaluations. Earthquake Spectra40(4): 2917–2946.
33.
Garcia-SuarezJAsimakiD (2020) On the fundamental resonant mode of inhomogeneous soil deposits. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering135: 106190.
34.
GaspariniDAVanmarckeEH (1976) Simulated earthquake motions compatible with prescribed response spectra. Report No. R76-4. Boston, MA: MIT Department of Civil Engineering.
35.
GouletCMaechlingPMazzoniSSilvaF (2018) SCEC BBP Study 17.3 Dataset [Data set]. Designsafe-ci. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17603/DS2267Q. Accessed 23 December 2020.
36.
GunturiSKV (1993) Building-specific Earthquake Damage Estimation. PhD Thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
37.
HamburgerRO’MalleyJ (2019) Welded Steel Moment Resisting Frames. STRUCTURE Magazine, February2019, p. 15.
38.
HeresiPMirandaE (2023) RPBEE: Performance-based earthquake engineering on a regional scale. Earthquake Spectra39(3): 1328–1351.
39.
HousnerGWThielCCJr (1990) Competing against time: Report of the Governor’s Board of Inquiry on the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Earthquake Spectra6(4): 681–711.
40.
KaufmannEJFisherJWDi JulioRMGrossJL (1997) Failure analysis of welded steel moment frames damaged in the Northridge earthquake. NISTIR, 5944, January. Gaithersburg, MD: NISTIR.
41.
LaiJWWangSSchoettlerMJMahinSA (2015) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing tall buildings in California: Case study of a 35-story steel moment resisting frame building in San Francisco. Report for the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. PEER Report No. 2015/14. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
42.
Molina HuttCRossettoTDeierleinGG (2019) Comparative risk-based seismic assessment of 1970s vs modern tall steel moment frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research159: 598–610.
43.
NaeimFDiJulioRBenuskaKReinhornAMLiC (1995) Evaluation of seismic performance of an 11-story steel moment frame building during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Technical Report: Analytical and Field Investigations of Buildings Affected by the Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1994. Report for SAC Steel Project. Report No. SAC 95-04, March. Richmond, CA: SAC.
44.
PhippsM (1999) Investigation of damage to WSMF by earthquakes other than Northridge. Report for SAC Steel Project Background Document, Prepared by the SAC Joint Venture, a Partnership of the Structural Engineers Association of California, Applied Technology Council, and California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Report No. SAC/BD-99/09, September. San Francisco, CA: SAC.
45.
PoulosAMirandaE (2022) Probabilistic characterization of the directionality of horizontal earthquake response spectra. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics51(9): 2077–2090.
46.
PoulosAMirandaE (2023) Effect of style of faulting on the orientation of maximum horizontal earthquake response spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America113(5): 2092–2105.
RathjeEMKottkeAROzbeyMC (2005) Using inverse random vibration theory to develop input Fourier amplitude spectra for use in site response. In: 16th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering: TC Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering Satellite Conference, Osaka, Japan, 12–16 September.
49.
ŞafakE (1993) Response of a 42-story steel-frame building to the Ms 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake. Engineering Structures15(6): 403–421.
50.
SchlockerJRadbruchDHBonillaMG (1954) Preliminary bedrock-surface map of the San Francisco City area, California (No. 54-274). US Geological Survey Open File Map. Available at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1954/0274/plate-1.pdf. Accessed 17 April 2025.
51.
SeedRBDickensonSEIdrissIM (1991) Principal geotechnical aspects of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Soils and Foundations31(1): 1–26.
52.
SomervillePYoshimuraJ (1990) The influence of critical Moho reflections on strong ground motions recorded in San Francisco and Oakland during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters17(8): 1203–1206.
53.
Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1988) Section 2312: Earthquake regulations. In: International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, CA, 28 October.
54.
WeinbergPGoltzJ (1999) The impact of earthquakes on welded steel moment frame buildings: Experience in past earthquakes. Report for SAC Steel Project Background Document, Prepared by the SAC Joint Venture, a Partnership of the Structural Engineers Association of California, Applied Technology Council, and California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Report No. SAC/BD-99/11, November. Washington, DC: SAC.
55.
YoussefNFBonowitzDGrossJL (1995) A survey of steel moment-resisting frame buildings affected by the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Report for US National Institute of Standards and Technology. Report NISTIR 5624, January. Gaithersburg, MD: NISTIR.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
